This article aims to provide insights into the concept of collective identity within the context of ASEAN integration. It delves into the transformation of Southeast Asia, which has shifted from a region under the dominance of European colonial powers to one that seeks to establish its unique identity and chart its own course. Additionally, it underscores the pivotal role played by collective identity in the process of integrating Southeast Asia while exploring the factors influencing its formation. In addition to theoretical exploration, this article posits that ASEAN’s collective identity, to some extent, finds resonance among elites, diplomats and technocrats but remains less prevalent among the general ASEAN population. Consequently, this article suggests the need for the development of a transnational mechanism or policy that facilitates and encourages the flow of people and information across borders. ASEAN should also consider reinterpreting its norms, promoting educational initiatives and fostering greater engagement with its citizens.
AcharyaA. (2000). The quest for identity: International relations of Southeast Asia. Oxford University Press.
2.
AcharyaA. (2001). Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order. Routledge.
3.
AcharyaA. (2005). Do norms and identity matter? Community and power in Southeast Asia’s regional order. The Pacific Review, 18, 95–118.
4.
AcharyaA., & StubbsR. (2006). Theorizing Southeast Asian relations: An introduction. Pacific Review, 19, 125–134.
5.
AdlerE. (2006). Constructivism and international relations. In CarlsnaesW., Risse-KappenT., & SimmonsB. A. (Eds), Handbook of international relations(2nd ed.). Sage.
6.
AllportG. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
7.
BeesonM. (2008). Institutions of the Asia Pacific: ASEAN, APEC and beyond. Routledge.
8.
BlondelJ., & InoguchiT. (2006). Political cultures in Asia and Europe: Citizens, states and societal values. Routledge.
9.
BrewerM. B. (1999a). Multiple identities and identity transition: Implications for Hong Kong. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23, 187–197.
10.
BrewerM. B. (1999b). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate?Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444.
11.
BrigevichA. (2011). Identity, attachment to Europe, and decentralization in the French regions. The European Union Studies Association Meeting.
12.
BusseN. (1999). Constructivism and Southeast Asian security. Pacific Review, 12, 39–60.
13.
Caballero-AnthonyM. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Singapore, 7January2013.
14.
ChalermpalanupapT. (2012). Interviewed by the author [in person] Singapore, 20December2012.
15.
CopelandD. C. (2000). The constructivist challenge to structural realism: A review essay. International Security, 25, 187–212.
16.
EmmersR. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Singapore, 22January2013.
17.
FullerG. A., MurphyA. B., RidgleyM. A., & UlackR. (2000). Measuring potential ethnic conflict in Southeast Asia. Growth and Change, 31, 305–331.
18.
GohG. (2003). The ‘ASEAN Way’. Non-intervention and ASEAN’s role in conflict management. Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs, 3, 113–118.
19.
GollmerA. (2011). Indonesia’s role in the Thai–Cambodia border dispute still unclear. http://www.dw.com/en/indonesias-role-in-the-thai-cambodia-border-dispute-still-unclear/a-6483440
20.
JonesL. (2011). ASEAN, sovereignty and intervention in Southeast Asia. Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
JonesM. E. (2004). Forging an ASEAN identity: The challenge to construct a shared destiny. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 26, 140–154.
22.
Lhay WeeY. (2012). Interviewed by the author [in person] Singapore, 13December2012.
23.
LiowJ. C. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Singapore, 17January2013.
24.
MinhP. Q. (2011). In search of an ASEAN identity: A view from Vietnam. Southeast Asian Studies: Vietnamese Academy of Social Sciences–Institute for Southeast Asian Studies, 24–33.
25.
MuhibatS. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Jakarta, 23March2013.
26.
NesaduraiH. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Kuala Lumpur, 5March2013.
27.
PhillipsD. A., & GritznerC. F. (2009). Southeast Asia. Facts On File, Incorporated.
28.
RisseT. (2000). Regionalism and collective identities: The European experience. The Workshop “El estado del debate contemporáneo en Relaciones Internacionales”. Buenos Aires, Argentina.
29.
RobertsC. (2011). Region and identity: The many faces of Southeast Asia. Asian Politics & Policy, 3, 365–382.
30.
RobertsC. (2012). ASEAN regionalism: Co-operation, values and institutionalisation. Routledge.
31.
SharpeS. (2003). An ASEAN way to security cooperation in Southeast Asia?The Pacific Review, 16, 231–250.
32.
SmithM. L., & JonesD. M. (1997). ASEAN, Asian values and Southeast Asian security in the new world order. Contemporary Security Policy, 18, 126–156.
33.
SolidumE. (1981). The role of certain sectors in shaping and articulating the ASEAN way. In AnandR. P., *QuisumbungP. V. (Eds), ASEAN identity, development and culture. University of the Philippines Law Centre.
34.
ThompsonE., & ThainthaiC. (2008). Attitudes and awareness towards ASEAN: Findings of a ten-nation survey. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
35.
ThompsonE., ThainthaiC., & ThuzarM. (2016). Do young people know ASEAN?: Update of a ten-nation survey. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
36.
WeatherbeeD. E., & EmmersR. (2005). International relations in Southeast Asia: The struggle for autonomy. Rowman & Littlefield.
37.
WendtA. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power-politics. International Organization, 46, 391–425.
38.
WendtA. (1994). Collective identity formation and the international state. American Political Science Review, 88, 384–397.
39.
WendtA. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge University Press.
40.
YongO. K. (2013). Interviewed by the author [in person] Kuala Lumpur, 21March2013.
41.
ZhangT. (2007). China’s role in East Asian community building: Implications for regional and global governance. Shanghai Institute for International Studies.
